Results tagged ‘ Instant Replay ’
You’ve seen it a hundred times: A player rounds third, heading for home; a strong throw from the outfield beats him to the plate; and the runner finds himself confronted with a catcher blocking his path, leaving him with no other choice but to plow over the catcher in hopes of dislodging the ball and subsequently being called safe. But due to a new rule (rule 7.13) instituted by Major League Baseball on Monday, you may never see that again.
An agreement to form some kind of rule to prevent home plate collisions was formed back in December at the Winter Meetings, however, it wasn’t until Monday that an official rule was released highlighting what will be allowed and what will not in 2014 (and beyond if the rule is successful).
The official rule is as follows:
A runner attempting to score may not deviate from his direct pathway to the plate in order to initiate contact with the catcher (or other player covering home plate). If, in the judgment of the umpire, a runner attempting to score initiates contact with the catcher (or other player covering home plate) in such a manner, the umpire shall declare the runner out (even if the player covering home plate loses possession of the ball). In such circumstances, the umpire shall call the ball dead, and all other base runners shall return to the last base touched at the time of the collision.
Rule 7.13 comment: The failure by the runner to make an effort to touch the plate, the runner’s lowering of the shoulder, or the runner’s pushing through with his hands, elbows or arms, would support a determination that the runner deviated from the pathway in order to initiate contact with the catcher in violation of Rule 7.13. If the runner slides into the plate in an appropriate manner, he shall not be adjudged to have violated Rule 7.13. A slide shall be deemed appropriate, in the case of a feet first slide, if the runner’s buttocks and legs should hit the ground before contact with the catcher. In the case of a head first slide, a runner shall be deemed to have slid appropriately if his body should hit the ground before contact with the catcher.
Unless the catcher is in possession of the ball, the catcher cannot block the pathway of the runner as he is attempting to score. If, in the judgment of the umpire, the catcher without possession of the ball blocks the pathway of the runner, the umpire shall call or signal the runner safe. Notwithstanding the above, it shall not be considered a violation of this Rule 7.13 if the catcher blocks the pathway of the runner in order to field a throw, and the umpire determines that the catcher could not have fielded the ball without blocking the pathway of the runner and that contact with the runner was unavoidable.
While the rule will take some time to get used to, for both the players and the umpires, for the most part, it’s being accepted around the baseball world. Nearly everyone agrees that the major injury to Buster Posey back in 2011 likely began the discussion for a rule of this nature to be put into place, and Posey’s manager, Bruce Bochy, has been one of the biggest advocators. Not wanting to lose a player of Posey’s magnitude in such a way again, Bochy made the statement in response to the new rule that he’s “all for it”.
However, some people aren’t completely on board, including Brewers’ catcher, Jonathan Lucroy, saying, “I’m a conservative-type guy. I like keeping things the way they are, although I do understand where they’re coming from . . . I understand the importance of [avoiding] concussions. I get it. It’s just really hard to break old habits.”
But the executive director of the MLB Players’ Association, Tony Clark, stands by the new rule. “We believe the new experimental rule allows for the play at the plate to retain its place as one of the most exciting plays in the game while providing an increased level of protection to both the runner and the catcher,” said Clark on Monday. “We will monitor the rule closely this season before discussing with the Commissioner’s Office whether the rule should become permanent.”
For me, I’m not fully for or against the rule. Collision plays at the plate can be extremely exciting, especially when it’s the potential game winning run, but I also don’t like seeing anyone get injured on an avoidable play. Although I feel that catchers have done a fantastic job in the last few years of making an attempt to move out of the base runners path and instead use a swipe tag for the out, this new rule will go a long way in ensuring that a rogue player with an altercation to settle doesn’t get away with going out of their way to knock over a catcher. I’m certainly all for that.
Major League Baseball announced its plan to expand instant replay, beginning next season, on Thursday afternoon, leaving baseball fans around the country with a mix of emotions. Some like the idea of further replay, while others prefer the way the game has always been, with the human element. (As I’ve stated in the past, I’m somewhere in between.) But no matter which side you fall on, you have to take the time to appreciate the fact that Thursday will forever go down as a historic day in baseball history.
But the news of further replay in 2014 shouldn’t come as a major surprise, as there has been a vast amount of debate recently, regarding a replay system for Major League Baseball that would enable the right calls to be made the majority of the time, without increasing the length of games–game time being the major concern among fans.
However, according to Braves’ President, John Schuerholz, the change in replay policy would decrease replay time, from a current average of three minutes and four seconds all the way down to one minute and fifteen seconds. That doesn’t seem like much, but when you combine multiple replays per game with the time saved by managers not arguing with the umpires over close calls–perhaps reducing the number of manager ejections, in the long run–it really does add up.
With advancing technology, many question why something hasn’t been done sooner–the NBA, NHL and NFL all have replay systems in place–however, it’s taken awhile, and a lot of convincing, for many people to get onboard with the idea; and of course, an agreeable plan had to be formed, over which plays will be reviewable and which won’t.
“Reviewable plays will cover 89 percent of those incorrect calls that were made in the past”, Schuerholz said on Thursday. “The 11 percent remaining are in the non-reviewable [category], which can still be argued by the manager. And the manager can still request that the umpires get together and discuss it to see if anybody else on the crew saw it differently. But it’s not reviewable.”
Here’s how the expanded replay is set to work:
Every game, each manager will get three challenges–one challenge from the start of game time through the sixth inning, with the other two challenges being available from the seventh inning on. If a manager elects to challenge a play, and the replay results in an overturned call, the manager receives his challenge back, which he can issue again, however, if the call stands, the manager loses his challenge, up until the seventh inning, when he will get another two to use, if needed. (If a manger doesn’t use, or lose, his one challenge in the first six innings, it doesn’t carry over.)
While this might seem a bit complicated, I actually find it rather appealing. It’ll keep managers from challenging a play unless they’re absolutely sure–in their mind, at least–that a call was blown. People seem to be complaining that managers will be challenging close plays right and left, but I disagree. I feel the managers will be less likely to attempt to challenge a non-crucial play. But only time will tell for sure.
“You should know that the umpires are very, very receptive to this”, said Schuerholz Thursday. “They have spent enough time being abused or being the butt of bad comments about what’s happened or what’s been viewed on replays. And with the advanced technology that we have on replays, they understand that it can be a valuable tool for them. And we intend to use it as that.”
The only flaw in the replay plan that I could see taking place is the fact that there’s still the chance of human error by the official play reviewer, at MLB.com headquarters, up in New York, that ultimately decides whether or not a call should stand.
Every once and awhile, even with replay, it can be difficult to determine for sure what the correct call should be. If the official gets the call wrong, one way or another, it could cost the manager his one challenge in the first part of the game, that he otherwise would’ve been able to use again, had the correct call had been made. And ultimately, it could cost the team the game.
Therefore, as with anything, it’s not completely perfect.
“It is a phasing plan”, as Schuerholz put it. “At the end of ’14, we’ll go back and look at what we’ve done well–what’s worked, what hasn’t worked–and make adjustments….It’s going to take some time.”
While it will indeed take some time, one thing is for sure: The game of baseball will never be the same, ever again. While some despise that, with the available technology, if you can work out a way to get the calls right the majority of the time, is a permanent change to the game really such a bad thing?
There’s been more talk lately about expanding instant replay in baseball than there ever has been in the history of the game. This coming due to advancing technology, and with that technology comes concerns that more needs to be done to get the calls right every time. (Something that truly can’t be done.)
But the topic of increasing what’s reviewable and what isn’t is controversial among many. Some feel that things need to be left just the way they are, sighting the human error element that’s always been part of the game, however, others are saying that as long as you have the technology, you should use it.
I stand somewhere in between.
I love the idea of getting every call right, but at the same time, I don’t see how that would be possible, and I somewhat enjoy the human element to the game. If you lose that, it’s not the same game anymore. Sometimes they get it right, sometimes they don’t. That’s the way it works. But I understand wanting to get the call right more often than not.
The main complaint that comes from those who oppose further replay is that it would lengthen games, which have historically increased in length over the past few decades. If you begin reviewing everything, a game which already takes roughly three hours to complete, could begin taking closer to four, depending on the events of any given day.
The only thing I see as being “unreviewable” is balls and strikes. While there’s no denying that umpires blow a few calls of the strike zone every game, there’s also no denying that reviewing every single close strike call isn’t a realistic option. There’s absolutely no need to do so, nor is there the time to do so. Other than that, everything is discussable for possible replay, in my mind.
But while everything other than balls and strikes is worthy of replay discussion, not every close play needs to be reviewed. Some things will have to be left off the list of reviewable plays or it’ll turn into a big joke of reviewing every single close call. I would hate to see that happen. But this is where it gets complicated: What should be reviewable and what shouldn’t? And why choose some things and not others?
My thoughts, looking at all of the possible controversial plays that can take place in a game, are that the major plays worth reviewing are the ones in which runs are scored; be it a questionable home run, trapped/caught ball in the outfield in which a run does or doesn’t score, fan interference that would’ve scored a run, and close plays at the plate. If it could be argued one way or another, it should be reviewed. As far as everything else, it doesn’t involve a run scoring, and I feel the umpires do a decent job of those type of plays for the most part.
So, to sum everything up as best I can, I’m for more replay in baseball, to an extent. You’ll never be able to get every single call right, but if you can increase the chance that the outcome of the game doesn’t turn out differently than it should have because of a blown call, by reviewing certain run scoring plays, why not make an attempt to try?
What do you think: Should there be more replay in baseball?